House Hearing, 114TH Congress - Fy 2017 Budget Priorities For South Asia: Recovery, Development, and Engagement

FY 2017 BUDGET PRIORITIES FOR SOUTH ASIA:
RECOVERY, DEVELOPMENT, AND ENGAGEMENT
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA AND THE PACIFIC

OF THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
MAY 11, 2016
Serial No. 114174
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
(
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/ or
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

20099PDF WASHINGTON : 2016
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 5121800; DC area (202) 5121800
Fax: (202) 5122104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 204020001
VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:49 Aug 02, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 F:\WORK\_AP\051116\20099 SHIRL
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida BRAD SHERMAN, California
DANA ROHRABACHER, California GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
JOE WILSON, South Carolina GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida
TED POE, Texas BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
MATT SALMON, Arizona KAREN BASS, California
DARRELL E. ISSA, California WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina ALAN GRAYSON, Florida
MO BROOKS, Alabama AMI BERA, California
PAUL COOK, California ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California
RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas GRACE MENG, New York
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania LOIS FRANKEL, Florida
RON DESANTIS, Florida TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas
TED S. YOHO, Florida ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
CURT CLAWSON, Florida BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania
SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee
REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin
DAVID A. TROTT, Michigan
LEE M. ZELDIN, New York
DANIEL DONOVAN, New York
AMY PORTER, Chief of Staff THOMAS SHEEHY, Staff Director

JASON STEINBAUM, Democratic Staff Director
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA AND THE PACIFIC

MATT SALMON, Arizona Chairman
DANA ROHRABACHER, California BRAD SHERMAN, California
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio AMI BERA, California
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California
MO BROOKS, Alabama GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania GRACE MENG, New York
SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee
(II)
CONTENTS
Page
WITNESSES
The Honorable Nisha Desai Biswal, Assistant Secretary, Bureau of South
and Central Asian Affairs, U.S. Department of State ...................................... 5
The Honorable Jonathan Stivers, Assistant Administrator, Bureau for Asia,
U.S. Agency for International Development ...................................................... 22
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING

The Honorable Nisha Desai Biswal: Prepared statement .................................... 8
The Honorable Jonathan Stivers: Prepared statement ........................................ 25
APPENDIX
Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 46
Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 47
Written response from the Honorable Nisha Desai Biswal to question sub-
mitted for the record by the Honorable Grace Meng, a Representative
in Congress from the State of New York ........................................................... 48
Written responses from the Honorable Jonathan Stivers to questions sub-
mitted for the record by the Honorable Matt Salmon, a Representative
in Congress from the State of Arizona, and chairman, Subcommittee on
Asia and the Pacific ............................................................................................. 49
Questions submitted for the record by the Honorable Matt Salmon to the
Honorable Nisha Desai Biswal and the Honorable Jonathan Stivers ............. 51
(III)
FY 2017 BUDGET PRIORITIES FOR SOUTH
ASIA: RECOVERY, DEVELOPMENT, AND
ENGAGEMENT
WEDNESDAY, MAY 11, 2016
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA AND THE PACIFIC,
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:09 p.m., in room
2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Matt Salmon (chair-
man of the subcommittee) presiding.
Mr. SALMON. This committee will come to order. Members
present will be permitted to submit written statements to be in-
cluded in the official hearing record.
And without objection, the hearing record will remain open for
5 calendar days to allow statements, questions, and extraneous ma-
terials for the record subject to the length limitation in the rules.
The South Asians subcontinent is one of enormous potential.
This important region of over 112 billion people, including 40 per-
cent of the worlds poor, is often overlooked, or viewed primarily
through the lens of the challenges in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
But the rest of South Asia is more significant than the attention
it receives would suggest. India recently surpassed China as the
worlds fastest growing and large economy, and the region is look-
ing to enhance trade connectivity to boost growth.
On the other hand, South Asia still faces major development
challenges, including weak governance, corruption, and threats
from violent extremism. We will hear from the administration wit-
nesses today on its efforts in these areas.
Given Chinas interests in building influence in the region, I
would also like to hear about the administrations work to maintain
relevancy in South Asia.
This hearing will focus on the Fiscal Year 2017 State Depart-
ment and U.S. Agency for International Development budget re-
quest for the South Asia region. I look forward to hearing from the
panel about how we are to boost U.S. presence in this important
region.
India is undoubtedly a very important partner for the United
States. We have many interests in India, including facilitating In-
dias membership in APEC, which I have spoken many times and
checked in with you guys about, ongoing BIT negotiations, and
strengthening defense and security agreements.
(1)
2
Twenty percent of Indias population lives in extreme poverty,

with one-fourth of the total population completely off the electric
grid. If India is to realize its leading role in the region, it must fa-
cilitate reforms to create opportunities and better lives for its own
people.
How are we assisting the Indian Government and leveraging the
private sector to improve the conditions of the people in India?
India is clearly a priority for the administration, but what progress
is now being made? This committee has concerns about antiquated
protectionist policies that hold back Indias full-growth potential
and hurt U.S. companies. Restrictions on market access including
direct retail sales, weak intellectual property protection, and the
time required to resolve contract disputes are among the top con-
cerns for U.S. businesses.
Prime Minister Modi has made economic reform a centerpiece in
his administration, and I am very pleased that he has.
What are we doing to help spur the Indian Government in the
much-needed opening of Indias economy? Sri Lankas new govern-
ment has been touted as more American leaning than the prior ad-
ministration, but more work lies ahead. The Fiscal Year 2017
budget request for Sri Lanka is a tenfold increase from previous
years, now at 39.8 million. How will such an increase in funding
work toward bolstering democratic change and strengthening civil
society organizations?
Many successful efforts in South Asia are transferable between
countries. How are we ensuring adequate transfer of successful
programs to leverage resources efficiently? Nepal faced a dev-
astating earthquake last year, and the House responded with a res-
olution that myself, along with Ranking Member Sherman, put for-
ward. We stood with Nepal. And my State of Arizona even lost one
of our finest in the efforts to search and rescue, and we continue
to assist in rebuilding.
This years budget calls for an increase of 8.3 million for Nepal
for continued relief efforts. Please update us on these efforts in
Nepal, including timeframe and the outlook to completion.
Bangladesh receives the largest amount of U.S. development as-
sistance and global funding in the region. Bangladesh is considered
a moderate Muslim country, receives the most attention for coun-
terterrorism efforts, yet, continues to struggle.
Since 2013, several bloggers and international activities have
been brutally killed, six in the past 12 months alone. I offer my
deepest condolences to the families and friends of the USAID em-
ployee and local human rights activist, who was brutally murdered
just a few short weeks ago. Bangladesh also continues to struggle
with democratic governance, the rule of law, and corruption.
The request for assistance to Bangladesh reflects an increase of
$13.5 million. I would also ask the panel to discuss overall assist-
ance to Bangladesh as it results to countering violent extremism
and providing for further freedom of expression without violent re-
course. I also want to understand what specific programs are we
putting in place to meet these challenges?
Finally, the Maldives, the smallest nation in the region, has
shown a worrying deterioration of its democracy, as well as con-
cerning percentage of its population traveling to the Middle East
3
as foreign fighters. South Asia is an increasingly important region

of the world. It is ripe with opportunity, yet held back by corrup-
tion, weak governance, and danger of extremism.
With our oversight hearing today, we will be discussing diplo-
macy and foreign assistance in South Asia, including progress
made over the past year. The United States should also look at
how to best connect South Asia to the Asia Pacific, integration that
would be vital to facilitating South Asias potential. I look forward
to the discussion not only on what was accomplished last year, but
what we accomplish next year.
And before I turn the time over to our ranking member, I would
like to recognize the Bangladesh Ambassador to the U.S. Would
you please stand and be recognized.
Thank you, Ambassador. We are really happy to have you here
today.
And I would like to now give time to the ranking member, Mr.
Sherman.
Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
South Asia, with nearly 2 billion people, by definition, is a major
focus of American foreign policy. As the largest democracy, second
most populous country, maybe soon to be first most populous coun-
try, and the third largest economy in the world, India is perhaps
the greatest geopolitical opportunity for the United States. The
United States and India share many core values, including reli-
gious pluralism, individual freedom, and the rule of law. Over the
past decade, the United States and India have worked to bring
India out from nuclear isolation, increased defense and security co-
operation, narrowed differences over how to combat climate change,
and a number of other signs of a more intense and high-quality re-
lationship.
Right now, our trade is about $110 billion in goods and services
both ways, and we are running a $20-billion deficit. I strongly sup-
port Vice President Bidens goal of increasing bilateral trade to
$500 billion, and I hope that that is $250 billion in each direction.
I know the administration has continued to pursue a bilateral in-
vestment treaty with India, and I am interested in knowing how
this would not only increase trade and investment, but lead to bal-
anced trade.
And I would admonish the State Department folks, who are here,
including, of course, the Assistant Secretary. Companies will come
to you saying, this is great for Americas economy, and what they
want is to make $1 million profit off a $1 million licensing fee. The
State Department needs to focus on the jobs, not the profits.
And, for example, I have seen the State Department actively
market cars made in Germany because, well, Chrysler asked them
to do it. They didnt bother to notice that the car was made in Ger-
many. So I am hoping that the embassies and others who report
to you are focused on the jobs aspect, not just whether there is a
familiar American company asking for help.
The International Energy Administration estimates that India
will require $2.1 trillion in investment in power sector loans to
meet pent up demand. I want to do everything we can to ensure
that American companies employing American workers provide a
4
good portion of the plant equipment and technology that would go

into that new infrastructure.
When we voted in favor of the nuclear cooperation agreement, we
were told that India would reform its liability laws to facilitate
American participation. I look forward to hearing from the wit-
nesses as to why India continues to have a legal structure that pro-
vides that level of liability protection to Russian, French, and Chi-
nese firms that can claim sovereign immunity, while, in effect,
freezing U.S. companies out of the market.
As to Bangladesh, the chair noted many of the concerns. Despite
development progress, there is the continued instance of extreme
poverty. The growth of Islamic extremism, murderers working their
way through a publicly circulated list of politically active members
of religious minorities. Less than 2 weeks ago, Xulhaz Mannan, a
USAID employee, was brutally murdered for his activism in human
rights. The home of a Christian family was bombed, and just last
weekend, a Sufi saint was murdered. I look forward to hearing how
we are addressing these concerns, particularly with regard to the
significant Hindu minority in Bangladesh.
I look forward to hearing your assessments on Sri Lanka and its
political process of reconciliation. I met recently with the Ambas-
sador of Sri Lanka and encouraged Sri Lanka to move forward to
increase American importimports from America, and, of course,
political reconciliation between the Sinhalese and the Tanuk com-
munities.
He explained that there were elements of progress, but as I
talked to those from the Tamil community, I see that progress
could be moving forward and more quickly toward giving more
local power to local officials and withdrawing the military from the
Northeast.
Even in the smallest country of the region, the Maldives, with a
population of only 400,000, we see important American interests at
stake. President Yameen is crushing democracy. It is becoming a
recruiting paradise for jihadists. More than 200 Maldivians are es-
timated to have traveled to Syria and Iraq, the highest record of
terrorist recruitment per capita in the world.
And when Islamic State fighters return to the Maldives, they
dont face prosecution. Of course, there are countries in Europe
where returning fighters do not face prosecution, and that is a mis-
take, both for the world and the individual country to which they
return.
Finally, with respect to Nepal, I hope to hear about the effective-
ness of the $130 billionmillion dollar U.S. response to the earth-
quake in April of last year.
Ms. Biswal, in your written testimony you say the needs are $6.6
billion. Two-thirds have been committed, but that we are meeting
only 10 to 18 percent of the housing and health facility needs. My
guess is that although the commitment may be at the two-thirds
level, the actual funding may be at the 5 or 10 percent level. And
I look forward to seeing what we can do and how the administra-
tion would justify its $109.3 million request, though. With that, I
yield back.
Mr. SALMON. The Chair recognizes Mr. Bera for an opening
statement, and then we will get to our witnesses.
5
Mr. BERA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Ranking Mem-
ber. And I look forward to hearing from the witnesses.
Obviously, this is an exciting time in the U.S.-India relationship.
I mean, it is a remarkable time in terms of the level of economic
cooperation and defense, the defense cooperation, and the possibili-
ties are endless.
Working with the chairman, you know, a logical next step in the
development of India and, you know, more broadly, South Asia, is
Indias membership in APEC, and certainly, this body looks for-
ward to working with the Department of State to push for Indias
membership in APEC, and we continue to encourage that. That not
only is beneficial to India, obviously that, you know, sets the stage
for the next step, as potentially getting bilateral investment treaty.
This also is beneficial to the entire region of South Asia. Obviously,
India is an economic powerhouse, but, you know, as Indias econ-
omy rises and develops, hopefully, that, then, spills over to Ban-
gladesh and the other countries in the region.
So, yes, I do see this, both from the USAID perspective, but also
from the U.S.-India perspective and U.S.-South Asia perspective as
a great next step to really start to accelerate the South Asian mar-
ketplace and the countries.
So thank you. I look forward to hearing that, and I will yield
back.
Mr. SALMON. Thank you. We are happy today to be joined by As-
sistant Secretary Nisha Biswal of the Department of States Bu-
reau of South and Central Asian Affairs, and Assistant Adminis-
trator Jonathan Stivers of the U.S. Agency for International Devel-
opment, Bureau for Asia. We are appreciative to have both of you
here today sharing your time with us. And I will recognize Ms.
Biswal first. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE NISHA DESAI BISWAL, AS-
SISTANT SECRETARY, BUREAU OF SOUTH AND CENTRAL
ASIAN AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Ms. BISWAL. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. Ranking
Member Sherman, thank you very much for the invitation to testify
today. And I would ask that my full written statement be sub-
mitted for the record so that I may summarize.
Mr. SALMON. Without objection.
Ms. BISWAL. As you know, Mr. Chairman, I spent the formative
years of my career working as a professional staff member on this
committee, and so, it has instilled in me a longstanding respect for
the important role of Congress in our foreign policy, and it is an
honor and a pleasure to be here before the committee.
It is also a deep pleasure to be here with my good friend and
former House colleague, John Stivers. John and I just returned
from Bangladesh, and we were there in the aftermath of the ter-
rorist attacks on Xulhaz Mannan. And I want to thank both of you
and the committee for the strong support of USAID, the U.S. Em-
bassy in the condemnation of that heinous act. I do believe that to
so manyXulhaz death reminds us of the risks that our diplomats
and development professionals face, and it is important to honor
their sacrifices. And, again, I thank you for your strong support in
that vein.
6
Mr. Chairman, as you noted, South Asia is at a pivotal point in

its development. It is on the cusp of a new era of opportunity, but
it is also buffeted by stark challenges, as both of you have noted.
A strong U.S. partnership with the region is critical to addressing
global issues of the utmost importance, mitigating climate change,
combating violent extremism, ensuring maritime security, eradi-
cating disease, decreasing poverty, and so much more, as well as
unleashing a new era of opportunity of growth and of shared pros-
perity.
With India, our diplomatic economic and defense partnership is
broader and deeper than ever before. As reflected in the strategic
and commercial dialogue and our trilateral and multilateral en-
gagements with India, including the administerial with U.S., India,
and Japan. The fact that we have had an unprecedented six leader-
level visits and meetings in the last 212 years, we are Indias num-
ber one partner in military exercises, its leading defense supplier,
and our commercial ties continue to expand, even as we explore
new opportunities to further increase our bilateral trade.
In Bangladesh, we are investing in a key strategic partner in
both regional and global challenges, such as climate change, food
security, reducing poverty, advancing health, and peacekeeping,
and many challenges remain in this dynamic country, despite re-
markable progress in many of these areas.
One-third of Bangladeshis still live in poverty. Its geography
makes it susceptible to the impacts of climate change, and ade-
quate protections for workers are still very much a work in
progress.
Yet, as both of you noted, many of the gains that Bangladesh has
made in human development and economic growth risk being un-
dermined by escalating extremism violence. As I noted, the recent
slaying of Xulhaz Mannan, a respected and admired advocate for
human rights, has shined an international spotlight on the increas-
ing threat to Bangladeshs diverse and tolerant society.
During our visit, John and I underscored Secretary Kerrys mes-
sage to the government and to the Prime Minister and the people
of Bangladesh that the United States will work with them in this
fight against violent extremism, and that during a time of such
challenge, it is all the more important to respect the rule of law,
political rights, and the ability for Bangladeshis to be able to speak
freely.
But Bangladesh has a history of overcoming difficult challenges,
and we are hopeful that with determined partnership, we can also
help Bangladesh defeat the extremists and terrorists that threaten
their vibrant society.
For Sri Lanka, the countrys strategic position in the Indian
Ocean makes it a key player in regional efforts to ensure maritime
security to protect freedom of navigation and response to national
disasters. Our bilateral relationship, as you have noted, has been
transformed over the past year, thanks to a unity government led
by a President and Prime Minister that are committed to reforms
that can benefit all Sri Lankans. We recently launched the first
U.S.-Sri Lanka partnership dialogue, and continue to look for op-
portunities to expand our partnership.
7
In Nepal, we continue to help the country recover from a tragic

earthquake that struck in April of last year to ensure that the de-
velopment gains from 60 years of partnership with Nepal are not
lost. It is critical that we continue to support that massive recon-
struction effort.
And, finally, given time constraints, I will refer you to my writ-
ten testimony for Maldives and Bhutan, but we share the concern
that on Maldives, that deteriorating democratic space in Maldives
creates a breeding ground for extremism, and we are determined
to work with partners and friends in the region and across the
commonwealth to ensure that we can support the aspirations of the
Maldivian people for a democratic society.
Finally, let me just conclude by recognizing that the rebalance to
Asia, that the President has put as one of the centerpieces of his
foreign policy, is fundamentally a recognition that the security and
the prosperity of the American people is inextricably linked with
the security and prosperity of Asia, and nowhere is that more evi-
dent than in the South Asia region. And we look forward to contin-
ued engagement with the important countries and people of that
region.
Thank you. I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Biswal follows:]
8
20099a-1.eps
9
20099a-2.eps
10
20099a-3.eps
11
20099a-4.eps
12
20099a-5.eps
13
20099a-6.eps
14
20099a-7.eps
15
20099a-8.eps
16
20099a-9.eps
17
20099a-10.eps
18
20099a-11.eps
19
20099a-12.eps
20
20099a-13.eps
21
20099a-14.eps
22
Mr. SALMON. Thank you.

Mr. Stivers.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JONATHAN STIVERS, AS-
SISTANT ADMINISTRATOR, BUREAU FOR ASIA, U.S. AGENCY
FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Mr. STIVERS. Thank you. Chairman Salmon, Ranking Member
Sherman, and distinguished members of this subcommittee. Thank
you for the invitation to testify today on advancing U.S. foreign pol-
icy goals in South Asia. It is an honor to be back again before this
committee, especially alongside my friend and colleague, Assistant
Secretary Nisha Biswal.
Before I begin, I would like to extend the deepest condolences to
the families and friends of Xulhaz Mannan. He was a member of
the USAID family in Bangladesh, and he was brutally murdered
late last month. Xulhaz embodies the very best of USAID. He was
a heroic leader for human rights including on LGBTI issues. His
tragic loss is a reminder of the risks that our staff take every day
in the field to improve the lives of the most vulnerable people.
Last week, Nisha and I were able to meet with his family and
friends to better understand his life and legacy and what he was
fighting for in Bangladesh, in addition to the growing violent extre-
mism in that country.
We are urging the Bangladesh Government, at the highest levels,
to fully investigate this violent attack, and others and bring the
perpetrators to justice. We are also ensuring the safety and secu-
rity of our staff as our highest priority in this difficult operating
environment.
The Presidents budget request of $440.7 million for South Asia
reflects our sustained commitment to this vitally important region.
While the region has achieved much success in terms of develop-
ment, significant challenges remain. South Asia has roughly one-
third of the worlds extreme poor, both the highest rates and larg-
est numbers of undernourished children in the world, and is ex-
tremely prone to natural disasters as we saw last April in Nepal.
We are working through three primary approaches in USAID.
First, we are pioneering a new model of development that focuses
on leveraging our impact and our funding by using public-private
partnerships, science, innovation, and regional solutions.
For example, in India, while our assistance dollars have been
steady, the total value of U.S. development programs have doubled,
because we are leveraging the private sector and international do-
nors to move forward and make progress on a lot of the very impor-
tant human development and health outcomes that we want to
have there.
Second, we are building pathways out of poverty through inte-
grated approaches with the three Presidential initiatives on global
health, Feed the Future, and climate change.
And, third, we are promoting democratic governance and empow-
ering reformers, because we know that the best chance of pro-
moting democratic change is to empower the reformers to change
their country.
In Bangladesh, USAID has helped the country make enormous
progress in recent years. They have been able to cut their poverty
23
rate in half. They have reduced deaths of mothers and children by

more than two-thirds. They have improved the management of 212
million acres of forest and wetland, home of the endangered Bengal
tiger, and we have helped introduce new rice varieties that can
withstand flooding and high salt levels. And as a result, Ban-
gladesh now does not have to rely heavily on rice imports. Despite
this progress and the tradition of tolerance in Bangladesh, rising
violent extremism is a threat to the countrys development.
USAID supports those who represent a democratic pluralist soci-
ety in Bangladesh, such as civil society and journalists. USAID also
works to address a weak judicial system by strengthening the abil-
ity of the institution to uphold the rule of law, and bring perpetra-
tors of violent extremism to justice. We will continue to analyze,
update, and implement our strategies to best help the reformers in-
crease and maintain the right of the Bangladeshi people to freely
express themselves through their religion or their political views.
In India, successfully addressing health challenges means suc-
cess on a global scale. Accordingly, the bulk of the budget requests
for India will go toward maintaining momentum on goals related
to child and maternal survival, HIV/AIDS, TB, clean drinking
water, and sanitation solutions. Addressing gender inequality is a
crosscutting focus of our USAID initiatives in India. We are help-
ing to implement a safe cities partnership that focuses on increas-
ing safety for women in public transportation, schools, streets, and
connects women with advocacy and support services.
When the earthquake struck last year in Nepal, our 20-year in-
vestment in disaster risk reduction proved critical to Nepals ability
to respond. From more than 1,000 USAID-trained first responders
who conducted search-and-rescue missions saving lives, to a major
hospital that continued treating patients uninterrupted, due to the
preparedness plan we helped them establish, the U.S. Government
mobilized 130 million to respond to the immediate post earthquake
needs, including construction of temporary schools, emergency nu-
trition and food, and expanding our countertrafficking in persons
work to earthquake-affected districts.
Many obstacles lie ahead. Reconstruction from the earthquake is
likely to take many years with total economic losses estimated at
$7 billion.
U.S. support for the international effort to help Nepals recovery
is critical to helping maintain development progress. In 2015, Sri
Lankans went to the poles to support a sweeping democratic re-
form agenda. Seizing on this democratic breakthrough, USAID is
helping Sri Lanka strengthen democratic institutions through the
Parliament, judiciary, and auditor general, as well as support for
civil rights and human rights.
In addition, we are providing economic help for the poorest and
most vulnerable Sri Lankans, especially in former conflict zones
with resettlement and economically lagging regions.
Mr. Chairman, alongside diplomacy and defense, development
plays an indispensable role in advancing our security and pros-
perity. We must address both immediate crises, and the root causes
of poverty, conflict, and instability. This is the heart of our work
in the South Asia region.
24
I appreciate the opportunity to testify, and I welcome any ques-

tions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Stivers follows:]
25
20099b-1.eps
26
20099b-2.eps
27
20099b-3.eps
28
20099b-4.eps
29
20099b-5.eps
30
20099b-6.eps
31
20099b-7.eps
32
Mr. SALMON. Thank you. I will ask the first question.

While the U.S.-India policy has been a pretty healthy one, and
our security relations have improved dramatically over the last 15
years, I dont believe that our economic relationship has quite kept
pace. U.S.-India economic ties and experts encouraged both sup-
porting Indias membership in APEC, and concluding a bilateral in-
vestment treaty in a recent hearing that I chaired about India and
the U.S. economic ties, there is strong support here in the Congress
for Indias entry into APEC. And I have introduced a bill to that
end, and Senator Cornyn released a companion bill just within the
last week or so.
The administration has maintained that it welcomes Indias in-
terest in APEC. Where do we stand on negotiations for a bilateral
investment treaty? And what else are we doing, from the adminis-
trations perspective, to improve economic ties?
Ms. BISWAL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me first thank you
and commend and welcome the leadership that you and many of
your colleagues have shown on the U.S.-India relationship and the
ambition that you have injected into that partnership in terms of
where you would like to see it go. I think that that has been an
important voice, and it has been much noted and appreciated.
I do think that as you noted, that the President has welcomed
Indias interest in APEC. I think that the size of the Indian econ-
omy makes it one that we want to engage with, and engage with
in an ambitious but constructive way.
There are a multiplicity of views with respect to Indias entry
into APEC. And largely, the conversation is around better under-
standing Indias desire for membership in APEC, and Indias ap-
proach and philosophy as it comes into a largely economically fo-
cused body on important issues of open free and fair trade. And I
think that those are conversations that are ongoing in the adminis-
tration with the administration and the Government of India, and
I think that those conversations will help chart the path for how
to move forward on Indias interests. Indias interests is one that
I think we welcome strongly, and I certainly heard that not only
from our President, but from across all levels of our Government.
With respect to the bilateral investment treaty, we have long
maintained that a high standard bilateral investment treaty be-
tween our two countries would greatly advance and facilitate addi-
tional American investment into India and would create a level
playing field for American companies and for American investment
so that there are the necessary safeguards and protections for that
investment, and I think that that will go a great deal toward en-
hancing confidence inamongst investors in Indias economy and
will facilitate greater investment flows.
We are already starting to see that U.S. investment is starting
to flow toward India, and, in fact, India becamesurpassed China
as the largest destination for some segments of American invest-
ment, and we are likely to see that trend continue.
We are in the midst of discussions on the bilateral investment
treaty to ensure that there is a firm commitment on both sides to
be able to address some of the areas of discrepancy between Indias
model BIT and what we see as a high standard investment treaty,
33
and we are hopeful and confident that those discussions can lead
to the formal launching of negotiations.
Mr. SALMON. So we are just really in the position right now of
starting the dance. You know, I know there are serious issues. You
know, I mentioned in my opening remarks concerns about allowing
us to sell on the Internet to individuals. Amazon has had some real
issues in India, and I would like to get those resolved. I know we
have had some agricultural issues that, you know, have been stum-
bling blocks in the past. And I also know thatand I dont know
whether this completely applies to bilateral investment treaty, but
a lot of our U.S. investors and companies that do business in India
are really concerned about the length of time that contract dispute
resolution gets done, gets handled.
The average time in court is about 4 years, and that is just not
acceptable. I know they are trying to move toward arbitration, but
I dont want to belabor that. But I know that there are several
issues. We are very interested in moving forward. I think there is
a lot of support in Congress. I know that there are issues. But, you
know, while doing it thoroughly and effectively, I would like to also
add expeditiously to the list, because I think it is incredibly impor-
tant that we further that relationship.
And the last issue I would like to just bring up is, again, India.
When we had the full hearing a couple of weeks ago, I was a very
loud voice about the potential sale of F-16s to Pakistan. India has
objected mightily to this, because there is a big fear thator con-
cern that they might use those F-16s against India. And it looks
as though that sale is kind of in limbo right now.
Could you kind of clarify to me where that might be, or what
your thoughts are on that?
Ms. BISWAL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First of all, let me start off by saying we have a very important
relationship between the United States and India. And we also
have a very important relationship between the United States and
Pakistan. Each relationship stands on its own merits, and is in fur-
therance of our goals and interests with both countries, and we
dont see them in any way as being zero sum.
The F-16 platform is one that we have felt has been used suc-
cessfully in combating terrorism, and that has been the basis on
which the administration put forward the notification to provide an
additional eight F-16s. However, we understand the very serious
concerns that have been raised by Congress, and those concerns
are right now being taken into consideration. And, so, I dont have
an update for you onwith respect to that notification and where
it goes, but I will say that we have recognized the concerns that
Congress has raised with us.
Mr. SALMON. In fact, I am just going to say one last thing and
then hand it over to Mr. Sherman, but I do believe that the admin-
istration has listened to what Congress said. I believe you are try-
ing to be responsive, and I want to compliment you for that. Be-
cause this was across the aisle. This wasnt just Republicans or
Democrats. This was across the aisle. A lot of concern that was ex-
pressed, and to its credit, the administration, I believe, is taking
those things into account, and I want to thank you for that. And
I will yield my time to Mr. Sherman.
34
Mr. SHERMAN. Thank you. I know the staff loves the chairman
veryoh, good. They did start my time over. I thought they were
going to charge my time for the fact that the chairman had extra
good things to say.
People outside of Washington look at Washington and say, they
come up with every weird argument to help Wall Street and to help
corporate America. When you go over to the Ways and Means Com-
mittee, we are told that we should forgo tax revenue, because we
need to create capital, because capital helps the American worker.
So we have a capital gains allowance. We have aI used to be able
to name 100 things we do to increase the amount of capital avail-
able for investment in the United States.
Then you, you know, you walk on over here from Longworth and
you come over to this room, and we are told it is just a wonderful
thing if this capital that we have accumulated can be deployed to
India. And what we need is to have taxpayer-paid officials nego-
tiate a great BIT agreement so that American companies will feel
good about taking this capital, which the Ways and Means Com-
mittee helped them create, and invest it abroad in India and else-
where.
Is there an analysis that shows whether a quality BIT agreement
will increase jobs in the United States? Is thereand is there one
that is not paid for by Wall Street?
Ms. BISWAL. Thank you, Mr. Sherman.
Mr. Congressman, let me just say, first and foremost, that we are
in support of an increase and enhancement in two-way trade be-
tween the United States and India, one that seeks to grow invest-
ment of U.S. companies in India, but equally of Indian companies
in the United States. And a high standard bilateral investment
treaty is not about, necessarily, whether this will facilitate the
outsourcing of jobs. It is about actually creating the level playing
field that ensures that U.S. investors are getting the same protec-
tions and fair and equitable treatment as investors from Japan,
from South Korea, and over 50 other countries that already have
investment treaties with India and enjoy those kinds of protections.
But I take your point with respect to ensuring that thethat the
trade and investment with thebetween the United States and
India is one that accrues benefits in both directions. And to that
effect, I would note that according to the U.S.-India business coun-
cil, Indian companies have invested more than $11 billion in the
United States over the past decade, and we probably can attribute
close to 100,000 U.S. jobs in all 50 States to
Mr. SHERMAN. But if I could interrupt. I dont think we need a
BIT to encourage Indian investment in the United States. I havent
heard too many Indian companies saying they wont invest here
unless we do a BIT, that they feel that they are being discrimi-
nated against as opposed to Japanese or British investors. We wel-
come the Indian investment here. It is a small portion of American
investment there, and a BIT will encourage more American invest-
ment there.
And let me shift to another aspect of this. One of the things we
export is planes. I know that the French and German Foreign Min-
isters are working every day to sell an Airbus. What have you and
35
the diplomats who report to you done to get them to buy American
planes
Ms. BISWAL. Thank you, Mr. Sherman
Mr. SHERMAN [continuing]. Other than ask them notto ignore
the silliness in Washington where we almost eliminate the Ex-Im
Bank. Hopefully, you hypnotized them into ignoring the craziness
here.
Ms. BISWAL. Congressman, we do do a great deal of commercial
advocacy on behalf of American companies to ensure that U.S. com-
panies are
Mr. SHERMAN. I will need to interrupt you. This is kind of a test.
I know the standard talking points that you are in favor of com-
mercial advocacy. I am kind of testing whether that is for real, be-
cause I had a different Assistant Secretary come here and say they
agreed on commercial advocacy and testified as to how he had
helped promote German-made cars without knowing it.
So that is why I asked a very specific question about planes to
see whether you could point to real specifics or whether it was just
the talking points that we believe in commercial.
Ms. BISWAL. So we have seen a dramatic increase in defense
sales to India
Mr. SHERMAN. Im sorry. Civilian planes. This is a question about
civilian planes.
Ms. BISWAL. On the civilian planes, I will have to get back to
you
Mr. SHERMAN. Okay.
Ms. BISWAL [continuing]. On a response on that. But I know we
have seen some major defense and transportation infrastructure
projects where American companies have one, including GE, loco-
motive, including a number of defense contracts with Lockheed,
with Raytheon, with Boeing and so on.
Mr. SHERMAN. I know the defense business is there, and you will
get back to me on the commercial side.
I brought up, in my opening statement, the civil nuclear indus-
try. Obviously, BHOPAL did not cast America in a good light. We
saw the Deputy Secretarys meeting with the Foreign Secretary on
this issue. How close are we to being able to put American nuclear
companies on the same liability level as others?
Ms. BISWAL. Congressman, I would say that one of the areas
where we have been able to have significant breakthroughs is on
the civil nuclear cooperation. We have seen, in the past year and
a half, significant progress with respect to Indias establishment
that its liabilities laws are compliant with the international con-
vention on supplementary compensation. India has now ratified,
and is now a member of the international convention on supple-
mentary compensation. India has established an insurance pool
thatthat, again
Mr. SHERMAN. Has the U.S. nuclear industry said, yes, that is
enough, or do they still regard it as not enough to allow
Ms. BISWAL. I think each individual company, at this point, has
to make its own commercial decision in terms of risk and in terms
of opportunity, and I think we are starting to see companies mak-
ing those decisions individually. Some are further along down that
road than others, but it is largely, at this point, a commercial deci-
36
sion. And we stand ready, through the U.S. Government, through

our financing bodies, like the Ex-Im Bank, to support that.
Mr. SHERMAN. So you are saying the Indian law fully matches
the protocol on liability?
Ms. BISWAL. That is correct. We do believe now that they have
a test that they meet those.
Mr. SHERMAN. I have gone over time. Thank you.
Mr. SALMON. Okay. I would like to yield to Mr. Perry.
Mr. PERRY. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Ladies and gentlemen,
thanks for being here. I am not sure who can, or would be willing
to answer the question, but I am hoping one of you can. So the
2017 budget request for Nepal includes an over 300-percent in-
crease in OCO, or overseas contingency operations funding, and a
nearly 50-percent decrease in the base. Now, while the OCO re-
quest includes some continued earthquake assistance, it also in-
cludes a significant amount of funding for seemingly normal pro-
grams, like elementary reading education.
Can either one of you elaborate on the justification for shifting
so much to the OCO account for Nepal?
Mr. STIVERS. Thank you, Congressman, for that question.
The earthquake that hit Nepal last year devastated the entire
country, either directly or indirectly. There are reverberations from
that massive earthquake that caused more damage than the earth-
quake in Haiti in terms of housing, schools, and overall damage.
And much of the budget will support this longer-term recovery.
Again, it is all interconnected.
You pointed out primary education, but realize, over 8,200
schools were destroyed during the earthquake, and I think that
with reconstruction, certainly in a lot of the other development we
do, it is hard to draw the line between what is earthquake and
what isnt in terms of how we move forward on development. And
so we believe that all of our efforts did meet the definition of OCO
in terms of responding to a natural disaster in that country.
Mr. PERRY. So is the OCO ever present, or is it only present in
times whereI mean, is that account ever present and just sitting
there waiting for something to happen for country after country, in-
cluding Nepal? Or how does that work?
Mr. STIVERS. I cant speak to the bigger budget issues, except for
just to say that Nepal certainly, in terms of the earthquake re-
sponse, we believe does fit under the definition of what OCO
should be used for.
Mr. PERRY. Okay. So I guess, then, the next question would be
how long are you projecting the OCO account to be necessary? Is
this going to be forever? You know, I understand we are trying to
figure out what the base should be, and I understand that there
is the circumstance that was maybe unexpected, and is an emer-
gency situation, which warrants the OCO, but at what point do
is there a plan? What is the plan to get back to the base, so the
American people can see that we are spending this much of their
tax dollars in Nepal?
Mr. STIVERS. We think it makes sense for Fiscal Year 2017 for
Nepal to be an OCO country. The decisions on whether in Fiscal
Year 2018 it would meet that definition, I think, depends on a lot
of circumstances, and we certainly need to consult with Congress
37
on that issue, and at the time the Fiscal Year 2018 budget is sub-
mitted. So I think it has to be determined at that time.
Mr. PERRY. So there, essentially, islike, you cant say that in
2017, under this OCO budget, this is what we plan to have com-
pleted, and which will require a continuation of OCO in 2018, or
will be substantially completed in 2017 and then go back to the
base? I mean, shouldnt we kind of have some idea now of where
we are going to stand at the end of the year, or do we just have
an expectation we are going to spend all this OCO money and then
at the end of the year, we will to take a look around and see what
we got, and see if we need more?
Mr. STIVERS. I think we have to evaluate Fiscal Year 2018 at the
appropriate time. I think we can evaluate Fiscal Year 2017. I think
over this next year, we can see how much progress has been made
there. It has been very slow progress in Nepal in terms of earth-
quake recovery. And I think that is a decision we have to make,
you know, in consultation with Congress.
Mr. PERRY. I hear what you are saying. To me, if I knowyeah,
just takeyou have an accident with your car and your insurance
company, and the adjuster looks at it and says, Here is the dam-
age. You didnt expect this, it is an emergency situation, and you
need the vehicle. It is going to cost $3,000 to fix it, right? And so
we set up and OCO fund, which is your insurance company that
pays $3,000 to fix the car. You take the deductible out. We know
what we are going to get to, right? We know it is going to cost this
much and then we are done. But what you are saying is that this
thing happened. We have got an open-ended budget as far as the
OCO will go, and we will look at the end to see what we got, then
we havein other words, there is no plan; there is no estimate.
There is no evaluation of when thishow far this is going to go,
I mean, until we get to the end? We dont have an idea?
Ms. BISWAL. Congressman, I understand the gist of your ques-
tion. I think the reason why you are not getting the clarity in the
answer that you want is because we havent yet determined, in the
Fiscal Year 2017 funds, how much out of OCO we will be able to
put toward Nepal, because of all of the other contingencies and ex-
igencies that are also right now under discussion.
When we have a clarity of how much of the Nepal recovery and
reconstruction we will be able to accomplish this year, we will be
able to make a determination if in Fiscal Year 2018, we will need
to pursue that or not. But it is a very finite and limited use of OCO
forfor, essentially, this earthquake recovery and reconstruction.
And we hope to be able to have clarity for you as we get a better
determination of how much we will be able to do out of the 2017
funds that Congress provided if we are going to need to pursue any
additional in the outyear.
Mr. PERRY. With the chairmans indulgence, let me ask this one
last question. So with the request being a 300-percent increase in
overseas contingencythe OCO fund, a 300-percent increase and a
50-percent decrease in the base, based on that, if you get that, you
mustyou must be planning for something with that money. You
must have come up with some estimate to arrive at the 300-percent
increase and the 50-percent reduction in the base. Would you be
38
done with the work if it goes as prescribed as expected at the end

of the year or not?
Ms. BISWAL. I wouldI am sorry. And I misspoke, it is the Fiscal
Year 2016 appropriation, which is right now with us, where we are
trying to make a determination. So the combination of what we are
able to realize in 2016 with what we have requested in 2017 will,
I think, determine whether, if we need to pursue anything else in
2018 or not. And we hope to be able to give you some clarity on
that. Those are conversations that we are very much in the midst
of right now in the administration looking at some of the other con-
tingencies that we are trying to address, and these are also con-
versations that we are very much having with the appropriators to
also understand their priorities, Congress priorities, with respect
to the use of OCO.
Mr. PERRY. All right. One last comment before I yield. I would
say, to me, from my standpoint, if I am one of the appropriators,
and you have got a 300-percent increase request and a 50-percent
deduction in the base request, ostensibly to go toward the OCO, I
am less inclined to be interested to provide that, unless I know
there is a plan, right, to spend last years money and this current
request to get to somewhere where I know I am going to be. And
what I didnt hearwhat I didnt hear was that there isnt any
plan. We are going to spend the money, and then we will let you
know if we need more at the end.
With all due respect, I think that is one of the things that frus-
trates the American taxpayer is these programs go on forever and
ever and ever. And we are paying you folks to make evaluations,
determinations, make estimates and put the moneyput the
money toward those things to finalize a completion.
And I dont know thatif we just do this, we are ever going to
be complete, because I am sure Nepal is always going to need more
money.
With that I will yield. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. SALMON. Thank you, gentlemen.
Ms. Gabbard.
Ms. GABBARD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Biswal, in your opening remarks you mentioned the
Maldivia, and I know you ran out of time, so I would like to ask
you to speak a little bit more about the Maldives, and specifically,
the percentage of their small population who are foreign fighters
who are traveling to Syria.
Can you talk about how the United States is working with the
Maldives to counter this strikingly high number of foreign fighters
that they have from the Maldives?
Ms. BISWAL. Thank you very much, Congresswoman.
We have multiple sets of issues that we are concerned about in
our tracking with respect to the Maldives. Certainly, the fact that
there is such a high per capita ratio of foreign fighters being re-
cruited out of the Maldives is a mounting concern. The fact that
the governance environment continues to deteriorate, that there
continue to be politically motivated arrests and trials, and that the
democratic space has been consistently deteriorating has, we think,
contributed to a greatercreating a more fertile field for recruit-
ment of extremist organizations.
39
And we have maintained over the years, and continue to main-

tain programs that are targeting combating terrorism and engaging
with civilian and security forces on specific concerns with respect
to trafficking of narcotics, of persons, and of financing that can
make its way toward terrorist organizations at the same time that
we are working both in our bilateral engagement, and with our re-
gional and commonwealth partners to try to address the govern-
ance environment to see if we cant bring enough pressure and
partnership to bear on trying to address some of the grave concerns
with respect to the governance challenges.
Now, I will confess that there is rising frustration in civil society,
in the human rights community, and in the international commu-
nity about the lack of progress from the Government of the
Maldives, and I do recognize that there have been increasing calls
for stronger actions with that regard, including actions, many of
who have been calling for sanctions, or travel bans, or visa bans,
to try to exert more pressure in that direction.
Ms. GABBARD. Thank you. Shifting over to Bangladesh, Mr. Stiv-
ers, you remembered thoughtfully, the USAID worker and human
rights activist who was slaughtered most recently. On Sunday, the
New York Times editorial board wrote about how Bangladesh has
descended into lawlessness. I introduced a resolution last year call-
ing on the Government of Bangladesh to protect the rights of reli-
gious minorities in the country, including Christians, secularists,
atheists, Hindus, Buddhists, et cetera.
Can you speak to what is your sense of the situation, and the
governments response? What more should they be doing than they
are already specifically?
Mr. STIVERS. Thank you, Congresswoman.
Over the last few years, the domestic and global situations have
combined to contribute to increasing radicalization. I think domes-
tically in Bangladesh, increased political violence and polarization
of political parties are key contributors, and there is a lack of polit-
ical space and free expression that are real challenges for the gov-
ernment in Bangladesh.
I will defer to Nisha to talk about her discussions with the gov-
ernment there. We know the targets include writers, activists, in-
tellectuals, and certainly religious minorities. Thank you for your
being such a champion on this issue, because you have identified
this issue long before some of these attacks happened.
And I think our development programs at USAID can help miti-
gate some of the underlying drivers of violent extremism, certainly
our support for civil society, human rights, voices of tolerance, jour-
nalists can help push back on some of the closing space in Ban-
gladesh.
We work with the judiciary, and I know DOJ and the Ban-
gladesh police support each other on community policing efforts.
And so our work in this sphere to promote free expression, to pro-
mote those reformers who are pushing for more free expression and
democracy and better governance in Bangladesh, those are the
folks that we support at USAID. And Xulhaz Mannan was really
a hero in pushing on those exact things.
Ms. BISWAL. If I may add to what John has said. This is, obvi-
ously, an area of mounting concern for us and was the focus of our
40
meetings and conversations with the government we met with not

only foreign ministry, but home ministry and law enforcement offi-
cials, and we met with the Prime Minister to discuss what we could
do in terms of both providing support and partnership, and
strengthening the capacity and the ability of the government of law
enforcement to, one, protect vulnerable communities and prevent
acts of terror; but then, two, to investigate and hold people account-
able when there is violence. And this is incredibly important that
there be a very focused effort to fully investigate and bring people
to justice when there are attacks of this nature, and how we can
be supportive in that context.
We also talked about the need for us to work with civil society
organizations to ensure that they also have access to tools and
training and information with respect to their own security. And so
there is an effort underway right now from the United States to see
what more we can bring to bear in terms of tools, technology, and
resources. We have got a team heading out this week with my Dep-
uty Ambassador, Bill Todd, who formally served as the Assistant
Secretary in INL, but he is going along with a team from the coun-
terterrorism bureau, from the CSO office, and others. And quite
frankly, we expect that we will be engaging in a fairly intensive ef-
fort in the weeks and months to come to see how we can further
strengthen efforts to secure vulnerable populations, and to turn the
tide on extremism and terrorism in Bangladesh.
Mr. GABBARD. Thank you, Ms. Biswal. I am over my time, but
in closing, in all of your remarks, you talked about the tools that
the U.S. is trying to provide to support the Bangladesh Govern-
ment, but you didnt talk about the leadership and the resolve that
must begin and come from the Government of Bangladesh if there
is to be any progress. There are tools, and then there is leadership
and commitment to standing against these acts of terrorism and
extreme violence, and a commitment to hold those perpetrators ac-
countable. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. SALMON. Mr. Chabot.
Mr. CHABOT. Thank you very much, and thank you for being
here today. First of all, I would like to talk briefly about Sri Lanka.
They held elections obviously in 2015, and it has kind of marked,
I would say, a political shift that is pretty significant in the coun-
try. And I had been to Sri Lanka in the past, and kind of witnessed
firsthand some of the devastation that occurred during, and in the
follow-up to the civil war and the unrest that they had there for
quite some time, particularly in the north of the country and the
area around Jaffna. What would you say is the situation relative
to the government actually coming together, where Tamils feel an
actual role in the government?
When I was there, and this has been probably 5, 6 years ago,
they didnt feel like they were being treated at all well by the gov-
ernment. The government obviously had a different point of view
on this. What would you say is the situation, and especially on the
ground in the North? They said they were being excluded from
being in police departments and a whole range of jobs and things.
How are things now?
Ms. BISWAL. Thank you, Congressman. Let me say that there has
been a sea change between what the environment and the percep-
41
tion was in Sri Lanka amongst the Tamil and other minority popu-
lations in Sri Lanka, prior to the January 8, 2015 election, and
what has been the feeling, the perception, and the reality since
then. Now it is and continues to be a work in progress. There are
many, many areas where we want to see more actions and more
progress, but we do see a commitment and a steady sense of ac-
tions from the government, including on the return of land.
Over 3,400 acres of land have been returned from military to the
original landowners. We have seen the government take steps to
start looking at constitutional reform by convening its Parliament
as a constitutional assembly. We have seen, for the first time, a
Tamil leader named as the opposition leader in Parliament.
In May, the U.N. Special Rapporteurs on Judicial Independence
and Torture were welcomed into Sri Lanka, both of whom were de-
nied entry by the previous government. And the government has
shown itself willing to examine both the progress and the short-
comings, and to engage in an honest and open dialogue on what it
needs to do. We need to see some more progress on things like the
establishment of a commission on missing persons. We would like
to see them take a look at their Prevention of Terrorism Act and
to see how it can revised or reformed in light of changing cir-
cumstances on the ground, so that civil liberties can be ensured,
and many other things that I think we would like to see greater
progress on, but we are encouraged by the fact that there seems
to be a commitment to move forward.
Mr. CHABOT. Thank you. I have got a follow-up questions how-
ever, I have only got a minute and a half, and I wanted to shift
over to Bangladesh, so let me do that kind of quickly here as well.
The first time I was in Bangladesh, Khaleda Zia was in power.
And when I went back most recently, which was maybe 2 years
ago, Sheikh Hasina was in power, and met with both of them on
both those occasions. Obviously they have different points of view
on a whole range of issues. But the most recent time it was a cou-
ple of months before the election that didntwell, the election
happened, but it was boycotted by Khaleda Zias party. A couple of
questions. One, do they anticipate elections any time in the near
future, or what is the status on that at this point? And then most
importantly, relative to the violence that we have seen with the
Islamist extremists that have literally hacked people to death, and
other horrific things, in general, it tends to be when people have
criticized extremism, those people are targeted. Do you see that as
being an ongoing phenomenon? What is the government trying to
do to pushwhat are they doing to crack down on it without ex-
pressingwithout suppressing freedom of speech in the press, et
cetera? All in about 30 seconds.
Ms. BISWAL. Thank you, Congressman. With respect to the elec-
tions, my understanding is that the next elections would take place
in 2019. I have not heard any indication that there would be an
earlier timetable in terms of when the term is set to expire. We do
continue to urge that there be a more inclusive political process
and that the democratic space in the country be expanded to allow
for peaceful political activity. There has been a history of political
violence in Bangladesh, including a particular spate of political vio-
42
lence in 2015, which was of concern, and we have noted it both

publicly and privately in our conversations with political parties.
So I think that that is going to continue to be a space that we
need to engage on and to continue to bring to bear some pressure
to see some additional progress on political inclusion in Ban-
gladesh, but also a respect for a violence-free space in politics in
Bangladesh.
And finally, with respect to the rising incidences, and the fre-
quency of incidences of violence, of extremist violence, in Ban-
gladesh, I think that that is something we are seeing action and
focus from the government on, and that is something that I think
we want to try to, again, further capacitate.
So I did not mean to convey that the Government of Bangladesh
is not seized with the problem. I do believe that they are. I believe
that the Prime Minister was very clear in her determination to try
to address this. I think we can bring to bear, through our partner-
ship, greater capacity and greater focus on that.
Mr. CHABOT. Thank you. My time is expired.
Mr. SALMON. Mr. Connolly.
Mr. CONNOLLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and welcome. I want
to go back to Nepal for a minute, and following up on the gen-
tleman from Pennsylvanias questioning of the use of overseas con-
tingency accounts. And I may have misunderstood the gentleman
from Pennsylvania, but it seemed like his last observation was,
well, we are always going to have problems in Nepal. And that is
true, but I wanted to put this in perspective. The earthquake that
occurred over a year ago in Nepal, was it not something like the
third largest, most intense earthquake ever recorded? Mr. Stivers,
somebody?
Mr. STIVERS. I am not sure if it was the third, but the devasta-
tion was enormous.
Mr. CONNOLLY. And there was a second aftershock that was al-
most equally powerful. Is that not correct?
Mr. STIVERS. That is correct.
Mr. CONNOLLY. And it led to complete destruction of villages in
many valleys; I mean, total. Is that correct?
Mr. STIVERS. Yes.
Mr. CONNOLLY. And destroyed, you know, UNESCO-preserved
shrines and monasteries throughout the country, including in Kat-
mandu, the capital, and also led to a massive landslide on Mount
Everest itself, which did damage and took lives as well. Is that cor-
rect?
Mr. STIVERS. Yes.
Mr. CONNOLLY. Any estimate of what the total cost of the dam-
age done from all those events might have been?
Mr. STIVERS. The estimated damages are almost $7 billion.
Mr. CONNOLLY. How much?
Mr. STIVERS. $7 billion.
Mr. STIVERS. $7 billion. One of the poorest countries in the world.
Mr. CONNOLLY. Right. And how many people live in Nepal?
Mr. STIVERS. I think it is around 100 million.
Mr. CONNOLLY. 100 million? One of the criticisms that has been
leveled about the relief and recovery efforts is that money has been
very slow to be deployed, and as a result, reconstruction has al-
43
ready missed one monsoon season, and is likely to miss another,

partly due to corruption, partly due to government incompetence,
partly due to international relief incompetence, but also partly due
to the fact that absent verification and infrastructure for managing
these funds, international agencies and nonprofits are not going to
release them. Could you comment, because there are people in need
still living in temporary housing over a year after the devastating
earthquake.
Mr. STIVERS. Absolutely. Thank you, Congressman Connolly.
First of all, I think the population number is 20 million.
Mr. CONNOLLY. Yeah, I thought 20-something.
Mr. STIVERS. Im sorry. In terms of the damage, around $7 billion
in losses. More than 750,000 homes were destroyed. About 1,200
health facilities and hospitals, destroyed or damaged, more than
8,200 public schools destroyed or damaged. It was devastating. And
it occurred in, not so much the population centers that are more
easily accessible, but up in the mountain areas which are very dif-
ficult to get to, to get reconstruction, or humanitarian recovery, to
get that assistance to the people who need it. That continues to be
a huge problem in Nepal, and reconstruction has been slow. There
have been a number of constraints to that. Certainly the extent of
the damage, the fact that it has occurred mostly in remote areas
that are hard to access, and the limited capacity of the government
are issues. The Nepal Reconstruction Authority has just begun to
operate and international donors have been slow. There were a lot
of pledges, but the money has been a lot slower in terms of moving
forward in terms of reconstruction from a lot of the countries and
entities that committed a significant amount.
Mr. CONNOLLY. But if I can, one of the things that concerns me
though, I mean, my view about management is, number one, are
you seized with the mission? To allow a whole monsoon season to
go by, it is very difficult to do reconstruction and construction in
a monsoon season. So you have got to wait for that, and then
schedule your construction or building. And we are now in monsoon
season number two, I believe, and we still arent seeing reconstruc-
tion. That means people are once again without housing, without
shelter, without many of the basic necessities of life, and at risk,
in not a particularly favorable climate, both in monsoon and in
terms of winter. So what are we doing to try to light a fire under
folks to be seized with the mission, and are we seized with the mis-
sion?
Mr. STIVERS. Absolutely. In my written testimony, I explained a
number of things that we have done in terms of the reconstruction
and the recovery. We did pledge, commit and provide $130 million,
which was for the initial humanitarian response, and a lot of that
was used for reconstruction. As we move forward, we are trying to
find the funds to do more in terms of the reconstruction for our
part, but it continues to be a challenge. Certainly it continues to
be a challenge for us to do our part, and for the rest of the inter-
national community, and maybe I will defer to Assistant Secretary
Biswal about the diplomatic engagement on that.
Ms. BISWAL. Sure. But let me just make one observation on the
issue of the OCO before I talk about the diplomatic engagement on
Nepals recovery effort. We recognize that OCO is not for address-
44
ing kind of the long-term development needs, but for addressing ex-
igent circumstances, and the earthquake was certainly an exigent
circumstance. And the bipartisan budget agreement
Mr. CONNOLLY. And excuse me. I wish Mr. Perry was still here.
That was the point of my line of questioning. I dont disagree with
him normally, but what happened in Nepal is almost unprece-
dented, and certainly the worst to happen in Nepal, and it presents
and enormous challenge for us, the international community, and
not least, the Nepalese themselves. That is whyplease continue,
but that is the setting for the OCO provision here.
Ms. BISWAL. Exactly. And we recognized and I think Congress
recognized in the budget agreement by expanding OCO funds. So
that was putting the earthquake reconstruction in under OCO was,
in a sense, respecting the direction that we received from Congress
in terms of how and where to use OCO, and we hope to be able
to revert to a longstanding, regular development program in the
base as soon as possible. We want to address the exigent cir-
cumstances of the reconstruction and recovery as quickly as pos-
sible.
Mr. CONNOLLY. I know my time is up, and the chairman is being
very indulgent. But just to make a point, dont rush too much into
that. We have just established on the record we are in the second
monsoon season, and we havent really touched reconstruction. So
the idea that we would go back to business as usual when we
havent even addressed the crisis at hand a year after the fact I
think would be very imprudent management.
So lets not be rushed into that for forms sake. Lets make sure
that we are using resources in every which way we can to try to
return people to some sense of normalcy in their villages and towns
and cities in Nepal.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. SALMON. Well, I thank the panelists for being here today. As
always, you were very responsive.
Mr. SHERMAN. You are not going to do a second and third and
fourth round?
Mr. SALMON. Actually we have a meeting with the Peoples Con-
gress, what is it, the Foreign Affairs chairman, and that is in 10
minutes. And with the chairmans indulgence on my long-winded
responses, yours, all of us, I think we would probably be here for
a little while maybe extended beyond that. You have been wonder-
ful. I really appreciate it, and I appreciate the committee members
up here and the great questions. Thank you very much.
Mr. SHERMAN. We will miss you until next time.
Mr. SALMON. This committee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:20 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
APPENDIX
MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
(45)
46
f
20099n.eps
47
f
20099m.eps
48
f
20099c.eps
49
20099d-1.eps
50
f
20099d-2.eps
51
[NOTE: Responses to the above questions were not received prior to printing.]

20099e.eps

House Hearing, 114TH Congress - Fy 2017 Budget Priorities For South Asia: Recovery, Development, and Engagement

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

House Hearing, 114TH Congress - Fy 2017 Budget Priorities For South Asia: Recovery, Development, and Engagement

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FY 2017 BUDGET PRIORITIES FOR SOUTH ASIA:

RECOVERY, DEVELOPMENT, AND ENGAGEMENT

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA AND THE PACIFIC

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS

MAY 11, 2016

Serial No. 114174

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

AMY PORTER, Chief of Staff THOMAS SHEEHY, Staff Director

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA AND THE PACIFIC

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING

WEDNESDAY, MAY 11, 2016

Twenty percent of Indias population lives in extreme poverty,

as foreign fighters. South Asia is an increasingly important region

good portion of the plant equipment and technology that would go

Mr. Chairman, as you noted, South Asia is at a pivotal point in

In Nepal, we continue to help the country recover from a tragic

Mr. SALMON. Thank you.

rate in half. They have reduced deaths of mothers and children by

I appreciate the opportunity to testify, and I welcome any ques-

Mr. SALMON. Thank you. I will ask the first question.

sion. And we stand ready, through the U.S. Government, through

done with the work if it goes as prescribed as expected at the end

And we have maintained over the years, and continue to main-

meetings and conversations with the government we met with not

lence in 2015, which was of concern, and we have noted it both

ready missed one monsoon season, and is likely to miss another,

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

You might also like